Sexual selection on <i><scp>D</scp>rosophila serrata</i> male pheromones does not vary with female age or mating status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mate preferences are costly and are thought to evolve due to the direct and/or indirect benefits they provide. Such costs and benefits may vary in response to intrinsic and extrinsic factors with important evolutionary consequences. Limited attention has been given to quantifying such variation and understanding its causes, most notably with respect to the direction and strength of preferences for multivariate sexual displays. In Drosophila serrata, female preferences target a pheromone blend of long-chain cuticular hydrocarbons (CHCs). We used a factorial design to test whether female age and mating status generated variation in the strength and direction of sexual selection on male CHCs. Replicate choice mating trials were conducted using young and old females (4 or 10 days post-emergence) that were either virgin or previously mated. The outcome of such trials is known to capture variation in female mate preferences, although male-male interactions may also contribute. Directional sexual selection on male CHCs was highly significant within each treatment, but there was little evidence of any variation among treatments. The absence of treatment effects implies that the multivariate combination of male CHCs preferred by females was constant with respect to female age and mating status. To the extent that male-male interactions may also contribute, our results similarly imply that these did not vary among treatments groups. With respect to D. serrata mate preferences, our results suggest that either plasticity with respect to age and mating status is not beneficial to females, or preference expression is somehow constrained.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".